Before you read this article...

This is a site that promotes allowance of anyone to write what they feel like. The purpose is to promote overall freedom of expression despite ideological indifference.

Please take a moment to consider writing on this site for the promotion of overall internet freedom. No personally identifiable information is collected when registering and no money is made. This site only survives from the personal ideology of anonymous users and liberty with zero donation.

Altruism Creates the Guillotine

Altruism Creates the Guillotine published by The 1st Amender
Writer Rating: 2.6923
Posted on 2019-05-03Writer Description: Changing the way people think about news.
This writer has written 183 articles.

It is through altruism, the benevolence of man, that the guillotine is made. But, Mr. 1stAmender. You must be crazy. Why, there is nothing wrong with altruism! It is through altruism, Christ, and every religion in the world that has brought us such good and cheer through the effect of altruism! While I don't disagree in the goodness of religions or the benefits of helping your fellow man, it is a totally different notion of blind altruism. What do I mean by blind altruism? It is the sacrifice of yourself for the benefit of society.

Imagine for a moment, you, as an individual believe that you can help your friend because of your benevolence. Maybe for instance, they involve themselves in kick boxing. It is under your belief, your altruism that they should not involve themselves in kick boxing; for it is unsafe for them. What altruistic intent do you have by forcing another individual to be unable to assume risk? How is it, through a politician, by altruistic intent, believe that they have a right to the lives of other individuals?

"You must have X so that it may better your life." said the altruist.

"You need to be like Y so that you live a better life." said the altruist.

The altruist can assume ownership of your body, ownership of your life, and ownership of assuming your personal risk.

The common good of a collective -- a race, a class, a state -- was the claim and justification of every tyranny ever established over men. Every major horror of history was committed in the name of an altruistic motive. Has any act of selfishness ever equaled the carnage perpetrated by disciples of altruism? Does the fault lie in men's hypocrisy or in the nature of the principle? The most dreadful butchers were the most sincere. The believed in the perfect society reached through the guillotine and the firing squad. Nobody questioned their right to murder since they were murdering for an altruistic purpose. It was accepted that man must be sacrificed for other men. Actors change, but the course of the tragedy remains the same. A humanitarian who starts with the declarations of love for mankind and ends with a sea of blood. It goes on and will go on so long as men believe that an action is good if it is unselfish. That permits the altruist to act and forces his victims to bear it. The leaders of collectivist movements ask nothing of themselves. But observe the results. (Ayn Rand)

So through altruism, we assume the death and destruction of humans for the good of a collective mass. This was assumed through Nazi Germany. That there are those to be sacrificed for the "good" of humanity. By altruism. And again through Soviet Russia from the 1890s to the 1950s. Where we can justify the death and destruction of a minority group for the good of the collective mass. You sacrifice yourself simply for the good of the people. So then it is through the power of a government, the altruistic, that the guillotine is made and used. For through the collective mass, it benefits the death of others to solidify "good" based on the arbitrary notion of a politician.